Scan barcode
yaz20100's review
4.0
The book explains many of Carl Jung's ideas regarding the "unconscious" particularly the ones related to architypes, dreams and many symbols in dreams like hero, shadow, circle, anima, etc.. It also highlights the interpretation of dreams as a way to understand the unconscious.
americabelga's review against another edition
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
4.75
sciencefair200's review
I couldn't finish this one, regardless of how much I wanted to like it. Jung has a whole bunch of interesting ideas, but a) they do not hold up in the light of modern science, especially science about the brain, and b) ...this book is dripping with racism and sexism, even for being a product of its time. I got about halfway through- finishing the part of this book that Jung wrote, at least- but I bounced off hard, and I'm trying not to keep reading books that make me dread reading.
Jung's philosophy bundles a lot of unrelated brain processes together into a black box called 'the unconscious' and makes conclusions from there. Sometimes, this works, but a lot of the time it leads him to... strange or outright bad conclusions. His anti-atheism, for example- if people's unconscious needs to have certain things in it to be satisfied, then that's a 'valid' stance. But from what little I know about this, it looks like that's not the case.
The other thing is... ugh, this book is.... any psychology book from before the '70s or so is going to have some *questionable* ideas about how women are different from men, and this one is particularly bad. The second section of this book- which, to be fair, was *not* written by Jung, but by one of his followers- goes into detail about how the author perceives these differences. It's. Ah.
I'm going to let this excerpt speak for itself.
*Yeah.* This is where I stopped reading- I couldn't handle this nonsense anymore, and had this not been an ebook, I would have thrown it across the room. As it stands, I just stopped reading, because it was making me froth at the mouth.
This gets two stars, because Jung's section was genuinely interesting and his ideas are worth mining if you're a writer. I mean, Persona 5, nuff said. But it's just... not up to date, and full of absolutely toxic ideas. Not recommended unless you're interested in historical psychology and have a strong stomach for sexism and Noble Savage nonsense.
Jung's philosophy bundles a lot of unrelated brain processes together into a black box called 'the unconscious' and makes conclusions from there. Sometimes, this works, but a lot of the time it leads him to... strange or outright bad conclusions. His anti-atheism, for example- if people's unconscious needs to have certain things in it to be satisfied, then that's a 'valid' stance. But from what little I know about this, it looks like that's not the case.
The other thing is... ugh, this book is.... any psychology book from before the '70s or so is going to have some *questionable* ideas about how women are different from men, and this one is particularly bad. The second section of this book- which, to be fair, was *not* written by Jung, but by one of his followers- goes into detail about how the author perceives these differences. It's. Ah.
I'm going to let this excerpt speak for itself.
*Yeah.* This is where I stopped reading- I couldn't handle this nonsense anymore, and had this not been an ebook, I would have thrown it across the room. As it stands, I just stopped reading, because it was making me froth at the mouth.
This gets two stars, because Jung's section was genuinely interesting and his ideas are worth mining if you're a writer. I mean, Persona 5, nuff said. But it's just... not up to date, and full of absolutely toxic ideas. Not recommended unless you're interested in historical psychology and have a strong stomach for sexism and Noble Savage nonsense.
fictionista's review
2.0
Super dry, although it tried to be a very simple read, it erred towards dry, and even condescending at times. Also, extraordinarily dated.
morgan_blackledge's review
4.0
AA has a phrase for disliking, discounting or dismissing something before completely understanding or trying it:
“contempt prior to investigation”
When it comes to the depth orientation, I am plainly guilty of contempt prior to investigation.
Some of my contempt for depth psychologically stemmed from needing tangibility and clarity in my early training as a clinician.
I rejected old, non-scientifically derived models in favor of more contemporary, “evidence based” approaches e.g. CBT/DBT/ACT etc.
This is not a bad thing.
It was (and remains) a necessary counterbalance to my chaotic, new-age hippy childhood, and my flaky (but fun as fuck) party with me punker young adulthood.
When I (finally) stumbled into therapy in my early thirties, my therpaist jolted me out of my confused dysfunction with a little CBT and a lot of simple common sense, something I was severely lacking but desperately needed.
If she had been a Jungian, I may not have survived that painful period. I needed boundaries, structure and confrontation.
After my anarchic, acid test of a prior life, I needed the clarity and tangibility of positivistic, rational scientific materialism.
I am very grateful to myself for asserting that need in my clinical training. I didn’t want to emerge from that experience without something very concrete. It was absolutely the right move, and I’m still deeply rooted in CBT/DBT/ACT.
I worked in addiction treatment for the next 10 years, and CBT/DBT/ACT was precisely suited for that environment.
Given all that….
As I transition from working in a short-term, crisis management, milieu driven, team based recovery context, into a longer term private practice context, the use value of the depth orientation (and psychodynamic psychotherapy more generally) is absolutely apparent.
And that makes sense, as these methods were created in, and for, the private practice context.
I’m grateful that I have the foundations of CBT/DBT/ACT to build upon, and the boundaries I learned to set as a clinician in residential treatment are priceless.
But the depth/dynamic way of conceptualizing and working is speaking to me in a way that I simply can’t ignore.
And I’m going with it.
Of course, there is lots (AND LOTS) of useless nonsense to parse through, particularly in these (50+ year-old texts), but I’m not looking to these types of books for valid truth claims.
I’m looking to them for something that is useful, and wise, even if imprecise and subjective.
With that lengthy preface.
I kind of loved this book.
And it sort of blew my mind.
I was already familiar with most of the constructs covered in the book.
But I have to say.
I am relating to them in a much different way than in the past.
The important issues covered herein include:
The role of unconscious processes (instincts and preconscious thoughts and feelings) in human functions.
The role of archetype in human functioning.
And the process of individuation i.e. the process of emerging from the structureless pure potentiality of childhood, into the focused, self aware, specificity and focus of adulthood.
Individuation entails a close examination and a very personal interpretation of psychological content, and the archetypal symbolism and themes found therein.
In this way of viewing the project of human becoming. Consciousness holds the keys to the unconscious. In other words, reifying our unconscious, undifferentiated psychological content into conscious, specific from is the definitive human endeavor. And we need explicit language and constructs to give specific form and meaning to the otherwise undifferentiated miasma of our phenomenological experience.
Reading this has me trying new things, and pursuing new directions in therapy.
I feel vital and curious.
I’m glad I waited.
The timing seems perfect.
4/5 stars ⭐️
Why not five?
I was hoping for more original work.
Most of this book was authored by contributors other than Carl Jung.
And (of course) the text is dated in areas.
It’s like over 50 years old.
But don’t let that stop you.
Go ahead and get it if you’re curious or otherwise so inclined.
“contempt prior to investigation”
When it comes to the depth orientation, I am plainly guilty of contempt prior to investigation.
Some of my contempt for depth psychologically stemmed from needing tangibility and clarity in my early training as a clinician.
I rejected old, non-scientifically derived models in favor of more contemporary, “evidence based” approaches e.g. CBT/DBT/ACT etc.
This is not a bad thing.
It was (and remains) a necessary counterbalance to my chaotic, new-age hippy childhood, and my flaky (but fun as fuck) party with me punker young adulthood.
When I (finally) stumbled into therapy in my early thirties, my therpaist jolted me out of my confused dysfunction with a little CBT and a lot of simple common sense, something I was severely lacking but desperately needed.
If she had been a Jungian, I may not have survived that painful period. I needed boundaries, structure and confrontation.
After my anarchic, acid test of a prior life, I needed the clarity and tangibility of positivistic, rational scientific materialism.
I am very grateful to myself for asserting that need in my clinical training. I didn’t want to emerge from that experience without something very concrete. It was absolutely the right move, and I’m still deeply rooted in CBT/DBT/ACT.
I worked in addiction treatment for the next 10 years, and CBT/DBT/ACT was precisely suited for that environment.
Given all that….
As I transition from working in a short-term, crisis management, milieu driven, team based recovery context, into a longer term private practice context, the use value of the depth orientation (and psychodynamic psychotherapy more generally) is absolutely apparent.
And that makes sense, as these methods were created in, and for, the private practice context.
I’m grateful that I have the foundations of CBT/DBT/ACT to build upon, and the boundaries I learned to set as a clinician in residential treatment are priceless.
But the depth/dynamic way of conceptualizing and working is speaking to me in a way that I simply can’t ignore.
And I’m going with it.
Of course, there is lots (AND LOTS) of useless nonsense to parse through, particularly in these (50+ year-old texts), but I’m not looking to these types of books for valid truth claims.
I’m looking to them for something that is useful, and wise, even if imprecise and subjective.
With that lengthy preface.
I kind of loved this book.
And it sort of blew my mind.
I was already familiar with most of the constructs covered in the book.
But I have to say.
I am relating to them in a much different way than in the past.
The important issues covered herein include:
The role of unconscious processes (instincts and preconscious thoughts and feelings) in human functions.
The role of archetype in human functioning.
And the process of individuation i.e. the process of emerging from the structureless pure potentiality of childhood, into the focused, self aware, specificity and focus of adulthood.
Individuation entails a close examination and a very personal interpretation of psychological content, and the archetypal symbolism and themes found therein.
In this way of viewing the project of human becoming. Consciousness holds the keys to the unconscious. In other words, reifying our unconscious, undifferentiated psychological content into conscious, specific from is the definitive human endeavor. And we need explicit language and constructs to give specific form and meaning to the otherwise undifferentiated miasma of our phenomenological experience.
Reading this has me trying new things, and pursuing new directions in therapy.
I feel vital and curious.
I’m glad I waited.
The timing seems perfect.
4/5 stars ⭐️
Why not five?
I was hoping for more original work.
Most of this book was authored by contributors other than Carl Jung.
And (of course) the text is dated in areas.
It’s like over 50 years old.
But don’t let that stop you.
Go ahead and get it if you’re curious or otherwise so inclined.
distractmepls's review
2.0
Brilliant...but so reductionist. Where most would analyze, Jung synthesizes. I have a complicated relationship with Mr Jung--I like some of his intellectual descendants, but, eh. Some things simply defy explanation.
unclerooibos's review
4.0
A nice introduction to Jungian thought. Unfortunate how Jung apparently reinforced heteronormativity in the lives of his patients. I can think of two examples from this work. The illustrations aren't very detailed. Worth the read.
davidshq's review
3.0
This is one of those books that leaves one feeling both learned and confused. Did I just grow or did I just waste my time? I am still uncertain. See my full review here: http://www.daveenjoys.com/2012/06/03/book-review-man-and-his-symbols-author-carl-g-jung-et-al/
superracoon's review
Interesting for writers and artists but how these ideas are supposed to help anyone in pain is beyond me.